Herald and tribune. [volume] (Jonesborough, Tenn.) 1869-current, 1887-08-11
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
Our Opinion and the Basis Upon Which
It Is Founded.

t0r representatives, is so varied and the
reasons assigned for the said relative po-
sitions so numerous and voluminous, that
TO endeavor to keep track of the same or
to attempt to give anything like a fair
consideration to all of them would take
up more of our space than we are at
present able to devote to the subject.
But the matter is Of such general interest
that we cannot pass IL by without an ex.
preston Of opinion. at the least, and in
our judgment the opinions Of some three
or four of the leading legal lights Of the
State, who appear in the main to agree
upon its Interpretation can we think be
taken as a sufficient criterion for the gov.
crnment of the voters in this case.
Among the many who have lent their
mental energies to the unravelling of
this knotty problem, none is more dis
~tinguished than J. A. Cartwright, ESQ.,.
who at the meeting of the Bar Associa-
ton at Knoxville two weeks ago read q
paper on the subject from which we take
the following:
What Is the use and meaning OF the word
representatives in this connection, in the
phase 'citizens Of the state voting for rep
resentatives?" The trainers OF the constitu-
tion OF 1906 must have still had In their
minds the idea OF q difference in tho quail
fication OF electors voting for the two branch
es OF the general assembly as was the case In
the North Carolina constitution of l776, and
used the word representative as the broad
est and moro comprehensive term in order
TO include the largest lumber OF electors
with the least restricted qualification.
Tho constitution OF the United States re-
quires the qualification OF electors 10 vote
for members Of the house OF representatives
70 be that required to vote for members of
the most numerous branch of the state leg
i~slature, II being the popular branch OF con-
gross. 1t Is evident that the constitution
OF l706 intended the words, "voting for repre-
sentatives," TO refer to qualification, and this
language is carried into the constitution of
1884 and 1870 and should receive in those In
struments the construction. Having settled
the question of qualification of those enti-
tied TO vote on q constitutional amendment.
how is the required vote as TO mum ers to be
agcertained? In the constitution OF 1896 the
time of submission was liked Mt the next
general election when the electors were nc
tually voting for representatives, and In that
sort of case 1t was an easy matter to ascer-
| tain the number of electors voting for repre-
| tatives, and n majority OF those so voting,
voting in favor of the amendment, would
| approve or ratify 1t. But the constitutions
OF 1884 and 1870 confer on the legislature the
| power TO submit such amendment sin such
manner and at such times as the general as
sembly shall prescribe" Did this intend to
make q sweeping and radical change OF the
previous provisions on that subject? II so,
why retain the same language as used In the
previous constitution, viz: "a majority Of the
citizens voting for representatives" The
| uqa nf the lnttar wOrdq in IN xtQ n0giftOn IN
the former indicate an Intention TO qualify
the broad statement and limit 1t TO the
'.tirnes" OF o succeeding general election.
The legislature had no W TO submit the
proposed amendment at any time except
that OF n subsequent general election for rep
resentatives. But the legislature has given
It's power O broader scope, and has prescribed
a time other than that ofa general election.
And conceding that construction OF its
power to be correct, what vote Is required to
adopt the amendment under that exact
phase OF the. question? Here is an entirely
separate and Independent election freed from
any connection with a general election. The
only practicable n reasonable rule In such
n case is the general rule governing cleo
tions and hat is that the ballot box is the
n. OF those voting wo6hd control. This
rule prevails unless Changed by express Lam
\ guage. This Is the rnle on principle and au-
thority-Louisville & Nashville railroad vs..
Davidson county, l Sneed, 037. See also 3
Head, 20S and 1 Bax. w. English and other
authorities are to the same eflcct-l Lea,
2i3; II Pick, las; ~ Mo. Rex VS.. Foxcroft; 3
Burr, l0l7; Angel Ames on Corp. section
III. The line OF decisions In Tennessee con-
STRUNG, those provisions OF the constitution
OF 1870 that new counties cannot be laid off.
nor the county seats removed without the
| consent or concurrence of two-thirds of the
| qualified voters, do not conflict with the
rules hero commended for. Those decisions
were made on the express language OF TINT
part OF the constitution, and expressly con-
cede the correctness OF the cases cited above.
1t Is conceded that the constitution on the
question Under discussion is not entirely
plain. therefore we should give IL such a
construction rs Is practical, safe and reason-
able. We should look TO all Its parts and give
effect If possible, TO the whole instrument
and to every section and clause. II differ
ont portions seem to conflict the courts
must harmonlze them, II possible, and lean
In favor OF o construction which Will render
every word operative rather than one which
may make some idle and nugatory,
The conclusion then is:
LIST. Thu constitution gives the legislature
no power 10 submit an amendment nj any
time other than that of n subsequent gem
eral election for representatives.
I'd, II, however, the submission can be had
ut q special election the vote controlling the
adoption would be n majority of the votes
cast.
AS the products of more than one brain
often assist greatly in the solution of a
problem of any extraordinary toughness,
so in this case we believe in looking to the
opinions of other prominent persons for
a little light on the subject. In following
out this line Of reasoning we submit be.
low an extract from an opinion on the
same subject by Attorney John J. Yer
trees (:
In no just sense can 1t be claimed that the
be the same citizens who voted at the general
election In 1885. When, therefore, II IL assum-
cd that the words voting for Representatives..
etc" are 10 be taken us denotlng the. quantity
or number of votes, and not us prescribing the
qualifications OF the electors, the conclusion Is
logical that amendments should always be sub
mitted at ageneral election when the People
arc voting for their representatives: but tho
Constitution provides amendments may be SUBJ
mitted at special elections, whence IL must be
inferred that the words we are discussing are
not to be taken in n quantitatiye sense. Tho
correctness Of this conclusion is demonstrated
by the fact that the vote for Representative
furnishes no standard. The imposslbility of
finding by any plan how many votes were cast
for Representatives In the last election In coun-
ties where two or more are voted for which
constitute more than one-fourth of the House,
Is argued; how any criterion that can be
adopted may prove utterly fallacious and fail
TO ascertain the number of those voting for
representatives, the trouble arising from all
those falling TO vote for the full number they
ure entitled TO vote for and scratching the
ticket. Such n test must be guessed at. and no
judicial tribunal will ever declare II allowable
to patch and mutilate the organic law by n pro-
ceedlng based on q guess. The vote cast Mt the
last general election IL not TO be considered,
not only because there Is no authority in the
Constitution for 80 doing, but because II is ut
tcrly impossible TO ascertain from II tho only
fact for which II Is claimed that the vote may
be looked to at all.
II Is obvious the words are qualitative and
not q~uantitative, and that they denote tho
class OF qualification of the electors who may
vote onthe question. The Constitution should
b interpreted MS IL read, "a majority OF all the
citizens of the State legally capable OF voting
for representatives or qualified TO vote for rep
resenta!iyes, voting IN their f.yor. etc..
The conclusions reached therefore are:
!. The proposed amendments may be sub
mlttcd either at a general or special election,
q. The vote cast for representatives ut the
general election In 1899 Is irrelevant.
o. More thnn a mere majority OF the votes
cast at tho election upon the amendment will
be required to ratify Il.
4. Tho amendment mus receive the anlrma-
tive approval ofthe majority OF all the citizens
OF the State qualified 10 vote for representa-